MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973285178 · doi:10.1089/sur.2010.095

Effect of Body Mass Index on Treatment of Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections in Hospitalized Adults: Comparison of Ertapenem with Piperacillin-Tazobactam

2012· article· en· W1973285178 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Infections · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErtapenemMedicineBody mass indexPiperacillin/tazobactamTazobactamInternal medicineTolerabilityPiperacillinSurgeryConfidence intervalCarbapenemAntibioticsMeropenemAntibiotic resistanceAdverse effectImipenem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) are a common problem in surgical practice. The effect of body mass index (BMI) on the outcome is poorly understood. We compared the association of BMI and type of antibiotic therapy for cIAI described in a previously published trial of ertapenem vs. piperacillin-tazobactam (Namias N, Solomkin JS, Jensen EH, et al. Randomized, multicenter, double-blind study of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of intravenous ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized adults. Surg Infect 2007;8:15-28). METHODS: A post-hoc analysis was performed using data obtained from the published study. The effect of BMI and type of antibiotic used for therapy were calculated for clinically favorable outcomes at early follow-up assessment (EFA). RESULTS: The 231 patients who were microbiologically evaluable at EFA were stratified by BMI (<30 or ≥30 kg/m(2)). Twelve patients were excluded because of missing BMI data, leaving 219 patients for analysis. There were some differences in baseline characteristics between patients with a BMI <30 kg/m(2), including the source of intra-abdominal infection (more appendicitis in BMI <30 group; p=0.01) and gender (more men in the BMI <30 group; p=0.03). There was no difference in cure rates between the groups (82.9% for BMI <30 kg/m(2) vs. 74.5% for those with BMI ≥30 kg/m(2); 8% difference in proportions, 95% confidence interval [CI] -5%, 25%). There was an 80% favorable clinical response to ertapenem in the BMI <30 group compared with an 81% favorable rate in the BMI ≥30 group (-1% difference in proportions; 95% CI -22%, 19%). This compared with an 86% favorable response rate to piperacillin-tazobactam in the BMI <30 group vs. a 65% favorable clinical response rate in the BMI ≥30 group (21% difference in proportions; 95% CI -1%, 47%). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the cure rate of patients with cIAI in the BMI <30 and BMI ≥30 kg/m(2) groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the likelihood of response to an antibiotic regimen. However, there was a nominally 21% lower cure rate in the high BMI group receiving piperacillin-tazobactam (86% vs. 65%; 21% difference in proportions; 95% CI -1%, 47%), whereas there was only a 1% difference in the cure rate between BMI groups in the patients receiving ertapenem. This difference may be related to gender and etiology of infection. Although limited by the small number of high BMI patients and post-hoc methodology, these results merit consideration of the design of future prospective antibiotic trials to include stratification for BMI and consideration of the effect of BMI on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it